The bottom line is that the Sox do not finish seasons. They just don't and you can say that all the stats don't mean anything but obviously they do...because seemingly every year at this time we are having a similar discussion.

So now what is the solution? They have GOT to try to do something to correct this. If they are breaking down and becoming tired then there should be a way to remedy this...I know many have said a better bench would help but in 2006 they had a pretty good bench and it still made no difference. More rest for pitchers?

Part of the problem of the last few years (excluding this year) were the awful starts they would have to the season. Then they'd have to go on an exhausting run just to get to .500 and fade away.

Maybe its simply a mindset akin to the Metrodome or Johan Santana or the Royals...

This is a great example of ignoring statistics in favor of only relying on data that support a false supposition.

__________________
Ridiculousness across all sports:

(1) "You have no valid opinion because you never played the game."
(2) "Stats are irrelevant. This guy just doesn't know how to win."

" as someone else mentioned, every team has to deal with injuries."
yet. somehow, year in year out, White Sox' opponents somehow eke out
a little more health, a few more runs, a few more second-half wins...
Lip documents its an ongoing decade long trend, which points to the organizational approach to assembling a team. We did not have this prob way back when Sox had the AAA Iowa Oaks as perennial minor league winners and conduit of talent to the bigs, like Bill Sharp etc. Personally I think the WS are a bit long in tooth, have always had a pudgy slugger clogging up bases, and Konerko cannot carry the team on his back for an entire season.

" as someone else mentioned, every team has to deal with injuries."
yet. somehow, year in year out, White Sox' opponents somehow eke out
a little more health, a few more runs, a few more second-half wins...
Lip documents its an ongoing decade long trend, which points to the organizational approach to assembling a team. We did not have this prob way back when Sox had the AAA Iowa Oaks as perennial minor league winners and conduit of talent to the bigs, like Bill Sharp etc. Personally I think the WS are a bit long in tooth, have always had a pudgy slugger clogging up bases, and Konerko cannot carry the team on his back for an entire season.

But do the White Sox lose any more down the stretch than the 29 other teams? Do they have more injuries than the 29 other teams? You'd have to look at all of that before actually saying that those things about the White Sox. Unless facts aren't important and you're just looking at the White Sox in a vacuum.

It's only meaningful if it's significantly different as compared to the other 29 teams.

Is that what made the Twinkie dome curse significant? Not trying to ask in a confrontational tone, I'm really asking if thats what the difference is.

Because the Sox didn't lose EVERY game there...it just seemed like it. And it became big enough that we expected them to lose when they went there. It's kind of become similar to me in the second half. I don't feel confident in them to finish a season out because it's been all these years and they haven't done it. And personally I think the results support that. But to each his own.

"Statistics can be tortured to the point at which they will confess anything." -George Will

Lip, I think these seasons can be looked at as being mutually exclusive.

Take 2010 for example. Did you ever think that their poor start (24-33 on June 8 of that year) had more to do with their eventual downfall?

Or 2006. The pitching just ran out of gas. Plain and simple. Making the playoffs takes a little bit of luck too, and ****, the Sox were just unlucky during the 2nd half. Who the hell saw Detroit coming that year? Besides, you mention 94 wins as being right there for a playoff spot. They would have still went home with 94 wins that year, so what's the difference between winning 90 and winning 94, when it means you're still going home anyway?

It's also unfair to point out how the '08 team finished because they were already without their MVP (Quentin) and their all-star third baseman (Crede). Plus, they still made the damn playoffs anyway. Close, sure, but they still got in. End of story.

You also point out the 2009 team. Have you ever thought that the team wasn't all that great to begin with?

2009:
Games 1-81: 42-39 .518
Games 82-162: 37-44 .456

Before All Star Break: 45-43 .511
After All Star Break: 34-40 .459

I mean, come on. They played like an average team before the All-Star break, and guess what? They finished with a slightly below average record (79-83).

__________________

"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all."- Former Orioles Manager Earl WeaverGo Sox and Go Bearcats!

It's hard to point to one single thing as the cause of these assorted second-half flops. Every year is different.

2004, Frank and Maggs went down and it killed the Sox. 2006, Contreras and Buehrle showed signs of fatigue after doing a lot of the heavy lifting on the run to the World Series the previous year. 2008, we lost Quentin that last month, and he might have won the MVP if he had stayed healthy. When your best players get hurt or fail you, it's hard to get across that finish line.

I can't say there's necessarily a mental thing about second halves with this organization. This season reminds me of 2003, but what correlation could there be between now and something that happened nine years ago? Konerko is the only player left from that team. It's a totally different cast of people.

Like Lip said at the start of the thread, lack of depth has been my theory for these second-half slides. The Sox always, and I mean always, have a number of solid ballplayers on their roster. Aside from the disaster of 2007, this is a competitive club every year, and that shows that we've got some people here who can play. The question is, do we have enough people who can play? This year, I'd say no. Hell, Dewayne Wise, a journeyman outfielder, is head and shoulders above some of the other bench bums who have come through here this year. (Olmedo, Lopez, Hudson, Fukudome, Lillibridge, the list goes on and on.) You ride your top players hard, there's physical fatigue that can lead to mental fatigue over the course of a long year.

The other thing I'd point out is the Sox don't have that one really standout player who is looked upon as being among the best in the league at his position. We don't have a Cabrera. We don't have a Robinson Cano. We don't have a Josh Hamilton. We don't have a Joey Votto. We don't have that guy with an OPS over .900 who scares the piss out of the other team and just makes everyone around him better.

Now, I don't think you necessarily have to have that guy. There are plenty of examples of teams that have success without a transcendent star, but I do think it helps. There's really no question Cabrera and Fielder were more productive than Dunn and Konerko coming down the stretch this year. Cabrera and Fielder are simply better players than Dunn and Konerko. And while Chris Sale had a fine year and Jake Peavy is a solid guy, Verlander and Scherzer were simply better the second half. I do feel the star power of Detroit was a factor in this year's race.

I haven't studied it but my reaction for this year is we had a lot of past their prime vets who wore down. And our young pitcher Sale, was over-worked all year and got less sharp. The bad bench abetted all of this because they got too little rest early, and when Ventura rested them in August and September, the non-productive replacements led to losses.
Quintana just regressed to his norm I'd suspect.

But do the White Sox lose any more down the stretch than the 29 other teams? Do they have more injuries than the 29 other teams? You'd have to look at all of that before actually saying that those things about the White Sox. Unless facts aren't important and you're just looking at the White Sox in a vacuum.

Lip has documented that 6 of 10 years, the White Sox played sub-.500
ball in the second half. By definition, those years, the opponents were better
at overcoming adversity and winning games. That is a fact, 6 of 10 years the
Sox won less than half of their second half contests, while those same 6 years, the opposition won more than half (>50%) of second half games against the White Sox. Those years, the W/L record reveals the bottom line, and not a vacuum.

I notice that Oakland runs out a young lineup with farm call-ups every year, and often that team gets better as the season progresses. The White Sox seem to get overly sober and tired.

Prior to 2004 the chat room was used more, but membership grew to the point that the chat just wouldn't work anymore, so we started the game threads instead.

Thank you. I assume the chat logs were never saved.

One great thing about this site is that we can take a walk down memory lane in a way that can't be replicated by simply watching old games on videotape. When Lip mentioned all those prior collapses, it was intriguing to relive them through WSI game threads.

__________________
MRKARNO04-04-2005, 04:03 PM
I was a doubter, but maybe, just maybe we can win with pitching, defense and fundamentals.

This is a great example of ignoring statistics in favor of only relying on data that support a false supposition.

What information or proof do you need to convince you of anything? This is about as close to a burning bush as you can get. The Sox have made a habit of tanking in the second half in the last decade. Does deconstructionism that is the rage among some mean you have to ignore reality?

I disagree. I think it's a function of a shallow roster, which is a function of this organization's long-term refusal to pay for top amateur talent in the draft, inability to develop fundamentally sound position players, and thus necessity to trade its limited supply of promising prospects to fill holes with mediocre and/or expensive veterans.

Indeed. I would also like to point out Kenny Williams penchant for having two big, lumbering slowpokes (Thomas-Konerko, Konerko-Thome, Konerko-Dunn) for first base/DH duties. Why not four outfielders, with the fourth outfielder your DH?

Lip: Interesting info. If somone had some time, I think it would be interesting to see if there was a trend in the offense or pitching consistently dropping off in the 2nd half.

Lets not forget. This is a 10 year stretch. The same pitching coach has been in place these 10 years. If the pitching has been the problem in 2nd half swoons, then mabe Coop is the problem. I think we all agree, the offense was the problem this time. But team .ERA went from 3.91 pre All Star to 4.15 post. Runs scored went from 4.8 pre to 4.4 post.